I Think This Forum Should Stick To Investing

[Mountaineer]

The people that have the biggest problems with political discussions are usually the ones that proclaim themselves to be the Arbiters of Truth.

https://publications.morningstarministr ... e-brief-48

Sounds like you could have written this article. The AoT crowd are possibly the Darwin/Freud/Marx dreamers resurrected.

[Xan]

Go look at my poll. There are 9 people that said they have considered leaving this forum because of politics. I've spoken to a few people that have left, and a few people considering leaving lately. This is not just about me. This is a real problem.

You need a new poll, one that specifically says something like "Since the creation of the Politics subforum which can be opted out of".

Smithers for example might answer yes to your current poll, but he's quite satisfied with the solution currently in place.

Can you describe some way in which the current solution is insufficient?

[vnatale]

I agree the forum is being split in two directions and I vote we get rid of the finance and investing talk and focus on the politics. Politics is interesting and dynamically changing while the PP has been the same for 20+ years.

How hard is the permanent portfolio, really? The whole point is that it’s simple and brainless once you have it set up. Do we really need to keep discussing the best gold coin of 2020 to buy?

I come here for the politics and get sucked into reading about gold ETFs and it’s really distracting me from political conversation.

Our beloved Tomfoolery has spoken!

Amusing, as usual.

I also know this is your usual satirical comment. I for one still have tons of questions on specific implementation of various aspects of the Permanent Portfolio.

Vinny

Vinny my interweb friend, you seem to be a very very precise person. Thus my question, exactly how many questions are in a ton, or tonne if you are feeling particularly British at this particular moment ?

You are correct that I can be an extremely precise person. Sometimes maddingly precise for some who have to deal with me in real life. But to better answer your question...once I get back on my Permanent Portfolio journey you shall see in real time!

Vinny

[vnatale]

I agree the forum is being split in two directions and I vote we get rid of the finance and investing talk and focus on the politics. Politics is interesting and dynamically changing while the PP has been the same for 20+ years.

How hard is the permanent portfolio, really? The whole point is that it’s simple and brainless once you have it set up. Do we really need to keep discussing the best gold coin of 2020 to buy?

I come here for the politics and get sucked into reading about gold ETFs and it’s really distracting me from political conversation.

I know I'm new but I wanted to respond by saying that this is the reason why I joined today. The PP is deceptively simple but the fact that this forum is so small and that it's so difficult to convince people to invest in the PP suggests that it's not that simple. I think most of the regulars here understand that there is the HBPP 4x25 and then there are the PP assets. The great thing about the PP is that it can be as simple or as complicated as you want to make it, both the most simply elegant and the most intellectually complex portfolio out there in my opinion.

Your last sentence reminds me of what I have many times read about The Bible. It can be understood by the simplest minds but still confound the best minds.

Vinny

[pmward]

I don't understand. The whole point of the politics subforum was to keep politics separate from the rest of the site's content. As far as I can see it's been very successful so far. If you don't like the political content, then just don't browse this area?

I personally just don't see that there's a problem anymore. I almost never venture into this part of the forum and as a result the rest of the site is like an entirely new place to hang out.

I think you're right on, Smith.

pmward, I'm not sure I'm understanding the problem. If you don't like the political discussion, then you can now opt out of seeing notifications from the political subforum. (Except for threads you're subscribed to.) Have you tried that? I've had that enabled since the beginning and it really is refreshing.

So I'm not seeing your problem nor understanding your solution. Splitting into two forums would solve what? You wouldn't like the political forum (since you're complaining about that discussion here). You can already have this forum minus politics by opting out. Having the political forum here gives people who want to discuss it an outlet. I certainly have no interest in policing a forum to make sure no political discussion takes place, but the "self-policing" of mostly confining politics to the political section seems to be a great success.

It looks like you in fact are in the non-political group already. Might I suggest that you unsubscribe from some threads if its existence is still bothering you?

Holy frijoles, I leave the house for 4 hours and come back to 7 pages of complete nonsense (except for the Tomfoolery satire, which as always gets a big LOL). +1 on both Smithers' and Xan's comments above. Good lord pmward, there is no politics in the investment threads, so I'm not sure what your gripe is. Just don't read, and more importantly don't post, in the politics section if you don't want to. WTF?

Go look at my poll. There are 9 people that said they have considered leaving this forum because of politics. I've spoken to a few people that have left, and a few people considering leaving lately. This is not just about me. This is a real problem.

I have only one question for you, pmward. If you don't like the politics section why the heck are you one of the most prolific posters in that section?

How many times do I have to tell you IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT ME. People I like have left. People I like are threatening leaving. Not just leaving this sub, but leaving the forum altogether. This does not bother you?

[sophie]

pmward, in regard to the title of this thread:

Thankfully it's not up to you. Political discussions have been an important and valued part of this forum since way before you appeared on the scene. It is your responsibility to put the "politics" subforum on your exclude list if you don't want to participate in those discussions. Or stop posting in them and just don't read the threads.

What you've done here is the equivalent of writing to the New York Times and telling them they must dump their real estate section because you don't like to read it. There is a mature way to handle this. I'll leave you to figure out what it is.

[pugchief]

I don't understand. The whole point of the politics subforum was to keep politics separate from the rest of the site's content. As far as I can see it's been very successful so far. If you don't like the political content, then just don't browse this area?

I personally just don't see that there's a problem anymore. I almost never venture into this part of the forum and as a result the rest of the site is like an entirely new place to hang out.

I think you're right on, Smith.

pmward, I'm not sure I'm understanding the problem. If you don't like the political discussion, then you can now opt out of seeing notifications from the political subforum. (Except for threads you're subscribed to.) Have you tried that? I've had that enabled since the beginning and it really is refreshing.

So I'm not seeing your problem nor understanding your solution. Splitting into two forums would solve what? You wouldn't like the political forum (since you're complaining about that discussion here). You can already have this forum minus politics by opting out. Having the political forum here gives people who want to discuss it an outlet. I certainly have no interest in policing a forum to make sure no political discussion takes place, but the "self-policing" of mostly confining politics to the political section seems to be a great success.

It looks like you in fact are in the non-political group already. Might I suggest that you unsubscribe from some threads if its existence is still bothering you?

Holy frijoles, I leave the house for 4 hours and come back to 7 pages of complete nonsense (except for the Tomfoolery satire, which as always gets a big LOL). +1 on both Smithers' and Xan's comments above. Good lord pmward, there is no politics in the investment threads, so I'm not sure what your gripe is. Just don't read, and more importantly don't post, in the politics section if you don't want to. WTF?

Go look at my poll. There are 9 people that said they have considered leaving this forum because of politics. I've spoken to a few people that have left, and a few people considering leaving lately. This is not just about me. This is a real problem.

I have only one question for you, pmward. If you don't like the politics section why the heck are you one of the most prolific posters in that section?

How many times do I have to tell you IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT ME. People I like have left. People I like are threatening leaving. Not just leaving this sub, but leaving the forum altogether. This does not bother you?

And yet, you still haven't answered my question in italics above.

[pmward]

I don't understand. The whole point of the politics subforum was to keep politics separate from the rest of the site's content. As far as I can see it's been very successful so far. If you don't like the political content, then just don't browse this area?

I personally just don't see that there's a problem anymore. I almost never venture into this part of the forum and as a result the rest of the site is like an entirely new place to hang out.

I think you're right on, Smith.

pmward, I'm not sure I'm understanding the problem. If you don't like the political discussion, then you can now opt out of seeing notifications from the political subforum. (Except for threads you're subscribed to.) Have you tried that? I've had that enabled since the beginning and it really is refreshing.

So I'm not seeing your problem nor understanding your solution. Splitting into two forums would solve what? You wouldn't like the political forum (since you're complaining about that discussion here). You can already have this forum minus politics by opting out. Having the political forum here gives people who want to discuss it an outlet. I certainly have no interest in policing a forum to make sure no political discussion takes place, but the "self-policing" of mostly confining politics to the political section seems to be a great success.

It looks like you in fact are in the non-political group already. Might I suggest that you unsubscribe from some threads if its existence is still bothering you?

Holy frijoles, I leave the house for 4 hours and come back to 7 pages of complete nonsense (except for the Tomfoolery satire, which as always gets a big LOL). +1 on both Smithers' and Xan's comments above. Good lord pmward, there is no politics in the investment threads, so I'm not sure what your gripe is. Just don't read, and more importantly don't post, in the politics section if you don't want to. WTF?

Go look at my poll. There are 9 people that said they have considered leaving this forum because of politics. I've spoken to a few people that have left, and a few people considering leaving lately. This is not just about me. This is a real problem.

I have only one question for you, pmward. If you don't like the politics section why the heck are you one of the most prolific posters in that section?

How many times do I have to tell you IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT ME. People I like have left. People I like are threatening leaving. Not just leaving this sub, but leaving the forum altogether. This does not bother you?

And yet, you still haven't answered my question in italics above.

There are now 10 people in my poll, a poll that is in this section that people can opt out of mind you, that have said yes they have considered leaving this forum because of politics. Why is that? Well, why when there is a car accident on the freeway to people slow down to look as they pass by? It's basically impossible to ignore it, whether or not you get notifications.

[tomfoolery]

Well, why when there is a car accident on the freeway to people slow down to look as they pass by? It's basically impossible to ignore it, whether or not you get notifications.

Your suggestion was to split the forum off into a separate gyroscopicpolitics forum on a different domain.

Wouldn't you still be tempted to navigate there, even if it was a separate site? Because, while it may not be a single hyperlink click away, it's only an extra 3 seconds to type that domain into your browser. Wouldn't the mere existence of the politics forum be a constant draw for you to look at, even if on a different site?

Would you be able to better ignore it if it was a separate domain?

[SomeDude]

Well, why when there is a car accident on the freeway to people slow down to look as they pass by? It's basically impossible to ignore it, whether or not you get notifications.

Your suggestion was to split the forum off into a separate gyroscopicpolitics forum on a different domain.

Wouldn't you still be tempted to navigate there, even if it was a separate site? Because, while it may not be a single hyperlink click away, it's only an extra 3 seconds to type that domain into your browser. Wouldn't the mere existence of the politics forum be a constant draw for you to look at, even if on a different site?

Would you be able to better ignore it if it was a separate domain?

I know I couldn't resist.............

[pmward]

Well, why when there is a car accident on the freeway to people slow down to look as they pass by? It's basically impossible to ignore it, whether or not you get notifications.

Your suggestion was to split the forum off into a separate gyroscopicpolitics forum on a different domain.

Wouldn't you still be tempted to navigate there, even if it was a separate site? Because, while it may not be a single hyperlink click away, it's only an extra 3 seconds to type that domain into your browser. Wouldn't the mere existence of the politics forum be a constant draw for you to look at, even if on a different site?

Would you be able to better ignore it if it was a separate domain?

Nope would not be "tempted to navigate there".

[Mark Leavy]

Do you have a weight problem, pmward?

[pmward]

Do you have a weight problem, pmward?

Not at all. And what does my weight have to do with the discussion?

[tomfoolery]

Do you have a weight problem, pmward?

Not at all. And what does my weight have to do with the discussion?

There's tons of McDonalds, Fast Food places, Vending Machines, and other food bad for you everywhere in society. Can you avoid going into those establishments and overeating, becoming obese, without the government shutting those businesses down to protect you from yourself?

[Tortoise]

I happened to glance at the OP's (pmward's) user profile just now and noticed that he's been a member since Jan 2019 and managed to stay away from the political threads almost completely until Nov 12 when he posted in the Politics sub-forum for the first time. That was less than three weeks ago.

I wonder why he doesn't just go back to doing what he did prior to Nov 12?

For what it's worth, I've noticed in recent years that most of the forum members who have either permanently left or mentioned thinking about it seem to share a few common characteristics:

- Arrived at the PP and this forum for analytical/quantitative rather than philosophical reasons
- Participate very frequently in VP threads predicated on the supposed ability to time, predict, or generally beat various markets
- Lean politically toward style over substance (e.g., decorum over policy)
- Are vehemently opposed to Trump

[dualstow]

Title says it. I don't think the political stuff belongs here.
...

Hi pm. Quoting post 1, but I've read the bulk of the thread, finally.

I opted out of the Politics section as I agree with almost no one and only peek in once in a while. I have to actively go there, as the posts aren't going to show up in the New Posts section (I think). It's quite peaceful.

With the addition of this new section, we see fewer political comments creeping in, but I like that they're allowed to creep in. I have to invoke the name: you know how heavy-handed Bogleheads' moderation policy is. I couldn't even talk about the minimum wage without getting censored and I eventually asked them to lock me me out after more than a dozen years on that forum.

Whether we have a section or a separate website (honestly, I don't think the latter is going to happen), members are generally allowed to speak freely, within reason. Political comments can creep in . They will creep in whether an attempt is made to relegate them to a section or to an entirely different website. It would take a lot of moderator man-hours to stop it all.

I don't like too much daytrading talk in the pp section, so that eventually gets moved to special threads. Sophie has a no-Trump-references thread going, and it's a pretty cool experiment. I've only edited one post, and haven't really kept up with it.

If you feel you're being abused, either in the threads or in private messages (except private messages from me. YOU WILL READ MY BULLYING AND LIKE IT!*) please get in touch with a moderator.

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

[pmward]

I happened to glance at the OP's (pmward's) user profile just now and noticed that he's been a member since Jan 2019 and managed to stay away from the political threads almost completely until Nov 12 when he posted in the Politics sub-forum for the first time. That was less than three weeks ago.

I wonder why he doesn't just go back to doing what he did prior to Nov 12?

For what it's worth, I've noticed in recent years that most of the forum members who have either permanently left or mentioned thinking about it seem to share a few common characteristics:

- Arrived at the PP and this forum for analytical/quantitative rather than philosophical reasons
- Participate very frequently in VP threads predicated on the supposed ability to time, predict, or generally beat various markets
- Lean politically toward style over substance (e.g., decorum over policy)
- Are vehemently opposed to Trump

The politics section literally was created just a few weeks ago... up until ~Nov 12 I left the forum entirely for 6 months due to the politics getting on my nerves. Obviously, I'm thinking of leaving again.

Are you admitting that this is a forum only for Pro-Trump, non-analytical/quant investors, that do not have a VP? Because the fact that all people that have left or complained supposedly have common characteristics... characteristics you don't have... proves my point exactly. Would those people have left if they felt like this was an open, welcoming, non-hostile environment here?

[pugchief]

The people here with PPs who don't like VP investing aren't complaining that there is a VP section. I, for one, simply turned that section off. I don't want to leave because a few folks want to talk about non PP investing.

[pmward]

The people here with PPs who don't like VP investing aren't complaining that there is a VP section. I, for one, simply turned that section off. I don't want to leave because a few folks want to talk about non PP investing.

So why then have so many people left? Why have so many people voted "yes" on my poll? A poll in a section they could choose to ignore? If there is no issue, and everything is just peachy, then why does this topic keep coming up? According to that poll, you have about half the active members that are not really happy here. Do you want us all to just leave?

[sophie]

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

+1000.

Curious how the Democratic party used to be about personal liberty, freedom of choice etc, but now it's about censorship, restrictions on individual liberties, and generally the idea that an "anointed" class exists who has the right to dictate to everyone else what they're allowed to do, say, and think. Which we are now seeing even in the microcosm of this forum. I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised.

[SomeDude]

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

+1000.

Curious how the Democratic party used to be about personal liberty, freedom of choice etc, but now it's about censorship, restrictions on individual liberties, and generally the idea that an "anointed" class exists who has the right to dictate to everyone else what they're allowed to do, say, and think. Which we are now seeing even in the microcosm of this forum. I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised.

The program designed to turn off man's natural free-thinking mind and subordinate him to the group (so he can be ruled) has been incredibly effective, even here in America. I'm pretty sure the millennials will suffer this psychosis worse than all previous generations. I don't know about the one after them but I'm not optimistic.

I think Trump has slowed it by showing you can stand up to the bullies, so more people are. We need to keep going, starting right here lol.

[mukramesh]

The people here with PPs who don't like VP investing aren't complaining that there is a VP section. I, for one, simply turned that section off. I don't want to leave because a few folks want to talk about non PP investing.

So why then have so many people left? Why have so many people voted "yes" on my poll? A poll in a section they could choose to ignore? If there is no issue, and everything is just peachy, then why does this topic keep coming up? According to that poll, you have about half the active members that are not really happy here. Do you want us all to just leave?

It seems obvious to me that the other members of this forum don't really care if people leave and they are addressing it by saying 'your poll is wrong' or 'they're wrong for being offended' (paraphrased).

Moderators/Admin seem to care since they split off the Politics section into a sub-forum. Props to them for doing that.

[doodle]

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

+1000.

Curious how the Democratic party used to be about personal liberty, freedom of choice etc, but now it's about censorship, restrictions on individual liberties, and generally the idea that an "anointed" class exists who has the right to dictate to everyone else what they're allowed to do, say, and think. Which we are now seeing even in the microcosm of this forum. I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised.

The program designed to turn off man's natural free-thinking mind and subordinate him to the group (so he can be ruled) has been incredibly effective, even here in America. I'm pretty sure the millennials will suffer this psychosis worse than all previous generations. I don't know about the one after them but I'm not optimistic.

I think Trump has slowed it by showing you can stand up to the bullies, so more people are. We need to keep going, starting right here lol.

Please watch this Some Dude....


https://youtu.be/LSnAYdQPnOw


I think this is the proper way for a President to deal with issues...heckler, bully's, etc. I don't think Trumps method is right....the drag them out of here, beat em up, jump into the gutter with them. I really admire obama for this...notice how he is calling out his own supporters and admonishing them for attacking a trump supporter. That is how a leader acts.

[dualstow]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

[doodle]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

I don't have a problem with Trump standing up for what he thinks is right. Hell, I think he's right about many things. It's the style in which he does it that is so detrimental to our nation. He creates a horrible atmosphere in which we can discuss and disagree. He takes things too personally, he's too thin skinned and narcisstic to deal with the abuse that a leader has to deal with. Trump is mean and vindictive to those who don't like him...and that is corrosive. Obama, didn't simply lay down to that heckler....but he dealt with it in a professional manner, with style, and gracefully....he didn't say drag that idiot out of here....back in the day they'd wheel guys like that out on a stretcher...or whatever Trump says.